Jesus vs. Alexander the Great

[Nanda]

I was told today by a Christian that there is more historical evidence for Jesus than there is for Alexander the Great. Having read that there is little evidence for Jesus outside of the bible, and all of it rather suspect, I find that a little hard to believe, but I could be entirely wrong. I'm certianly having a harder time finding what historians consider to be proof of Alexander's existance. Does anyone have any insight on this, or at least a good link?

 

[Ringer]

I was told today by a Christian that there is more historical evidence for Jesus than there is for Alexander the Great. Having read that there is little evidence for Jesus outside of the bible, and all of it rather suspect, I find that a little hard to believe, but I could be entirely wrong. I'm certianly having a harder time finding what historians consider to be proof of Alexander's existance. Does anyone have any insight on this, or at least a good link?

I'm going to start looking into the historical evidence of Jesus. From what I've been told, Josephus' works are a good place to start. But, I'd bet that you'd find more historical evidence of Alexander's existance. Basically conquering the known world will give you that advantage . Did I read your your sentence correctly when you said that you are having a hard time finding historical proof of Alexander's existance? If so, I wouldn't have though that that would be the case.

 

[Sunstone]

I was told today by a Christian that there is more historical evidence for Jesus than there is for Alexander the Great.

I suspect they have that one backwards.

 

[lamplighter]

Alexander founded Alexandria where he was put to rest after his death and he seems well documented enough, rightly so since he conquered all of the middle east in 13 years (and yet America is having trouble with one city over there ) So the question is what reasons are there for doubting Alexanders existence? Jesus is only mentioned in one book with hardly anything thing else to support his existence. True Alexander was a great King, but supposedly being the son of god one would think Jesus would have been equally documented.

 

[Comprehend]

Alexander founded Alexandria where he was put to rest after his death and he seems well documented enough, rightly so since he conquered all of the middle east in 13 years (and yet America is having trouble with one city over there )

I think you mean "one country" not one city. Anyway, America does not have the luxury of being allowed to slaughter everyone and burn the cities to the ground to gain control.

 

[Nanda]

From what I've been told, Josephus' works are a good place to start.

See, from what I've been told, Josephus' mention of Christ seems to have been tacked on later, or (depending on who you're talking to) he heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend and so forth.

But, I'd bet that you'd find more historical evidence of Alexander's existance. Basically conquering the known world will give you that advantage . Did I read your your sentence correctly when you said that you are having a hard time finding historical proof of Alexander's existance? If so, I wouldn't have though that that would be the case.

It's not hard to find scholars who say he existed, it's hard to find their sources. I want to know how much physical evidence there was for his existance.

 

[lamplighter]

I think you mean "one country" not one city. Anyway, America does not have the luxury of being allowed to slaughter everyone and burn the cities to the ground to gain control.

Nah, I still stick by my one city comment, just because we happen to be in other parts of Iraq doesn't mean we have control over the whole country, not to mention Baghdad is only partially under control and this control is quite fragile. If we had control road side bombings would be spuratic events and not happening everyday. We are far from control of Baghdad so what makes you think we're ready to take control of Iraq?

 

[Nanda]

I suspect they have that one backwards.

I suspect so, too. It sounds like one of those things that prostelytizing Christians say to atheists to stop them in their tracks, but on closer inspection, has little basis in reality. But I don't know, which is why I'm here asking.

The whole thing's silly anyway, and doesn't really support his areguement, since no one ever told me that I had to accept Alexander the Great as my personal lord and saviour.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I was told today by a Christian that there is more historical evidence for Jesus than there is for Alexander the Great. Having read that there is little evidence for Jesus outside of the bible, and all of it rather suspect, I find that a little hard to believe, but I could be entirely wrong. I'm certianly having a harder time finding what historians consider to be proof of Alexander's existance. Does anyone have any insight on this, or at least a good link?

From the almighty wiki:

Historicity of Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In The Historical Figure of Jesus, E.P. Sanders used Alexander the Great as a paradigm—the available sources tell us much about Alexander’s deeds, but nothing about his thoughts. "The sources for Jesus are better, however, than those that deal with Alexander" and "the superiority of evidence for Jesus is seen when we ask what he thought."[66] Thus, Sanders considers the quest for the Historical Jesus to be much closer to a search for historical details on Alexander than to those historical figures with adequate documentation.

 

[Nanda]

From the almighty wiki:

Historicity of Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I see... And that's only if you count the bible as a reliable source, am I right?

 

[doppelganger]

I see... And that's only if you count the bible as a reliable source, am I right?

That's what I gather from it. So now that they've made a movie about Alexander the Great, he's jumped back ahead of Jesus for the amount of "historical evidence" we have for him. Heck, you can rent the DVD and listen to Alexander for yourself.

 

[Smoke]

I was told today by a Christian that there is more historical evidence for Jesus than there is for Alexander the Great.

There are no surviving contemporary written accounts of either. However, Alexander left coins behind, some of which do survive. So I think your friend is wrong.

But I don't know what the point of that claim is, anyway. The fact that Jesus existed doesn't even begin to substantiate Christian claims about Jesus -- that he was God incarnate, born of a Virgin, died for your sins, rose from the dead, and ascended into heaven. Those are things that have to be accepted in blind faith.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I see... And that's only if you count the bible as a reliable source, am I right?

With Sanders, I suppose so.

 

[Comprehend]

Nah, I still stick by my one city comment, just because we happen to be in other parts of Iraq doesn't mean we have control over the whole country, not to mention Baghdad is only partially under control and this control is quite fragile. If we had control road side bombings would be spuratic events and not happening everyday. We are far from control of Baghdad so what makes you think we're ready to take control of Iraq?

It is not necessary to control every individual to control a country. If that is your criteria Alexander never controlled anything.

Surely you don't actually mean to argue that the US does not control a single city in Iraq. They clearly control a large number of cities.

 

[Nanda]

It is not necessary to control every individual to control a country. If that is your criteria Alexander never controlled anything.

Surely you don't actually mean to argue that the US does not control a single city in Iraq. They clearly control a large number of cities.

Alright guys, let's stay on topic, please.

 

[Pariah]

Nanda -

You should study Alexander's campaigns in India. Plus, the historian Megasthenes existence, although after Alexander, raises the question, "Why was there a Greek in India if Alexander hadn't been there?" (I relent, he might have been curious...)

The idea that Greek architecture is found in modern day Pakistan and Afghanistan (once ancient India) is testament to a Greek presence in those areas.

Plus, the presence of Alexander was the catalyst for India's very first emperor - Chandragupta Maurya (and his genius sage/guru, Chanakya) who made history by defeating Alexander's satraps in that area.

Today, there is no cultural evidence of Alexander because Indians just aren't like that (interracial and inter religious marriage among South Asians is the lowest among all races).

 

[Comprehend]

Alright guys, let's stay on topic, please.

mea culpa

 

[Alkaline03]

The Bible is generally disregarded by main-stream scientists as far as historical evidence goes. There is actually very limited evidence of Jesus as a historical figure out side of the bible, and the one piece of evidence that was frequently cited, i.e. The Antiquity of the Jews by the historian Josephus, specifically the section called Testemonium Flavianium, has been cited as an unreliable source due to the section showing evidence of being a forgery.

 

[wednesday]

I was told today by a Christian that there is more historical evidence for Jesus than there is for Alexander the Great. Having read that there is little evidence for Jesus outside of the bible, and all of it rather suspect, I find that a little hard to believe, but I could be entirely wrong. I'm certianly having a harder time finding what historians consider to be proof of Alexander's existance. Does anyone have any insight on this, or at least a good link?

Alexander is the greatest military hero of Greece, and thats basically an insult to Greek people. That person is mentally retarded, why would ALEXANDRIA be named so around the time Alexander "supposibly" conquered half of the known world at the time he reigned. Thats evidence in itself. Also there are 4-5 primary sources (Arrian, Diodorus, Herodutus, Plutarch and more) who generally corroborate on the events of his lifetime. Where are the primary sources on Jesus other than the bible (credible sources) that corroborate about his "miracles?"

 

[Somkid]

That's just funny. The question I like to put forward is, which Jesus are we talking about? Jesus of Nazareth? Jesus the son of Joseph? Jesus of Galley, Jesus the fisherman or Jesus the carpenter? Are they related to Jesus the Rabbi?

Yep, I think history is more in favor of the achievements of Alexander.